The many meanings of Schrödinger's cat

9 philosophers and scientists interpret quantum theory's famous thought experiment

Nine leading thinkers interpret the meaning of Schrödinger’s famous thought experiment. Amanda GefterSheldon GoldsteinJenann IsmaelChiara MarlettoTim MaudlinAlyssa NeyTim PalmerCarlo RovelliLev Vaidman

Introduction

Contemporary versions of Erwin Schrödinger’s famous cat thought experiment often prefer to use sleeping gas instead of cyanide. But for a cat in a box to be both asleep and awake - as opposed to the original cat which was both dead and alive - is, if decidedly less cruel, just as strange.

Writing to Einstein in 1935, Schrödinger’s imaginary experimental set-up was designed to expose the critical flaws of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which holds that quantum systems stay in a superposition of two or more states until the system interacts with an external observer [1]].

We might be able to dismiss this effect as a peculiarity of the microscopic world of atoms, but what happens when that world has a direct consequence on the macroscopic, everyday world of tables, chairs, and cats? That’s what Schrödinger’s thought experiment sought to illuminate, and in the process expose the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics as absurd.  It’s one thing having particles be in a state of superposition. But cats? Cats are either one thing or another, dead or alive, they can’t be both, surely...  

Continue reading

Enjoy unlimited access to the world's leading thinkers.

Start by exploring our subscription options or joining our mailing list today.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Log in

Join the conversation

Gabriel Vacariu 1 30 November 2022

On this topic, see Gabriel Vacariu article in Synthese (December 2005, USA), my 5 books 2008-2014 (all English, FREE), and my book from Springer (2016 Germany) “Illusions of human thinking” + PhD thesis 2007 (Philosophy webpage, UNSW, Australia) at my webpage With my EDWs perspective, I have changed completely the framework of thinking for ALL scientists (physics, cognitive science) and philosophers...
2020 Gabriel Vacariu Part 1 The world versus epistemologically different worlds (EDWs) About Nothing/Big Bang a FREE article here Gabriel Vacariu (0November 2022 to 2014) The UNBELIEVABLE SIMILARITIES between the ideas of some people (2011-2021) and my ideas (2002-2008) in physics (quantum mechanics, cosmology), cognitive neuroscience, philosophy of mind, and philosophy (this manuscript would produce a REVOLUTION in right international academic environment!)

Arten 7 April 2022

Who is the observer? Is it the scientist who opens the box? I say it is the Geiger counter.

It cannot be the instrument for reasons explained by Bernardo Kastrup.

Steve Maricic 25 February 2022

I'm not a physicist, so I probably have this completely wrong.

Who is the observer? Is it the scientist who opens the box? I say it is the Geiger counter.

Schrödinger wrote: "in a Geiger counter there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges."

The Geiger counter patiently watches (observes) the radioactive substance. If one atom decays, the Geiger counter observes that decay and responds to it automatically. The GC "discharges". The discharge hits a relay, which triggers a hammer, which breaks the vial. Up until that time, the cat is alive. After it, the cat dies.

If no atom decays within the allotted hour, the cat lives.

The cat is never both alive and dead.